Kind of illustrates how easy someone could write something and the first guy to read it already interprets his own way. How many times down the road does that happen? Besides, sometimes we don't even understand each other on this forum, how could we understand wave upon wave of interpretations of something written so long ago?

Kind of illustrates how easy someone could write something and the first guy to read it already interprets his own way. How many times down the road does that happen? Besides, sometimes we don't even understand each other on this forum, how could we understand wave upon wave of interpretations of something written so long ago?

Kind of illustrates how easy someone could write something and the first guy to read it already interprets his own way. How many times down the road does that happen? Besides, sometimes we don't even understand each other on this forum, how could we understand wave upon wave of interpretations of something written so long ago?

We simply cannot. That's why the focus should be on the age-independent aspect of spiritual evolution.

Kind of illustrates how easy someone could write something and the first guy to read it already interprets his own way. How many times down the road does that happen? Besides, sometimes we don't even understand each other on this forum, how could we understand wave upon wave of interpretations of something written so long ago?

We simply cannot. That's why the focus should be on the age-independent aspect of spiritual evolution.

Extremely insighful mccoy! I think that is what I have been saying all along in all my 'jabs' at old religious practice. These people just can't accept the fact that there may be Master's living in the now and last century that r bringing spirituality up to date.

That's why the focus should be on the age-independent aspect of spiritual evolution.

I'm trying to understand what you mean by this, could you explain, sorry.

SI, I mean, given the social and historical context so much different from the present one, we should concentrate on the universal truths expressed by these prophets and ignore soem details related to that specific culture.For example, St. Paul seems to extol slavery and submission of women in some of his writings. We should ignore that because those are remarks that can be understood and criticized only by knowing in the detail the cultural framework of that period.

SI, I mean, given the social and historical context so much different from the present one, we should concentrate on the universal truths expressed by these prophets and ignore soem details related to that specific culture.For example, St. Paul seems to extol slavery and submission of women in some of his writings. We should ignore that because those are remarks that can be understood and criticized only by knowing in the detail the cultural framework of that period.

OK makes sense, I guess. Hopefully we ourselves will develop the intuition needed to interpret these writings as they were meant to be, while understanding how they applied back then and how we can apply them now. Sure we might be able to rely on present day interpreters, but having it revealed to us at our own perception level would be ideal. It may just be a matter of asking and truly wanting that.